Support NeoGAF

[mdubs]

I don't know, Harper is already a joke if you've ever seen him with other world leaders.

His recent personal beef with Putin was just cringeworthy

Err, are you criticizing the government for criticizing Russia after all that Russia has done/is doing right now?

He has apparently *lectured* at the UofC. That's not what one usually means when they say someone "taught" at a university. Usually that means you're some kind of professor or adjunct, which as far as I can tell Harper has never been. I'm not sure where drama teachers came into things, but any drama teacher who actually does it for their job has almost certainly taught more than Harper.

edit: Oh I see, re. the drama teacher thing. Yeah, Trudeau has taught far more than Harper. And if you think being a high school teacher is easier than occasionally lecturing university students... well... I don't know what to tell you.

That would be a fair assessment if I was comparing how easy their jobs were, but I think we can probably agree that lecturing on economics is probably a little more relevant to running the country than being a drama teacher? Justin Trudeau just really gives off the impression he is riding hard on his father's (probably the most academically accomplished and intelligent Prime Minister we've ever had)coattails. His resume doesn't compare favourably to Harper and certainly not Mulcair, which doesn't inspire much confidence in me especially considering his weakness on the policy front.

 

[Stumpokapow]

i'm not sure what academic economics has to do with running a country. one of the loudest debates in econometrics over the last 30+ years is about how the real world doesn't care about it and there's a total divorce of theory and empirics. i understand the field has tried to fix things since then, but i still see no credible connection between being an economist and elected governance

Justin Trudeau might make a competent leader one day, but could you honestly imagine him alongside world leaders like Merkel and Putin? It would look like a joke, at least Mulcair is personally accomplished and has the necessary gravitas

dat gravitas

 

[maharg]

That would be a fair assessment if I was comparing how easy their jobs were, but I think we can probably agree that lecturing on economics is probably a little more relevant to running the country than being a drama teacher?

Have you ever watched a session of parliament?

Honestly, and all joking aside, I would answer yes. He has made no particularly interesting or novel contributions to the field, so he's about as qualified at anything as anyone with 2 degrees happens to be. If he had a PhD, perhaps. Even then, I've never seen anything (including Harper's approach to economics as a governor) to indicate that having a masters in Economics makes you particularly suited to running a country. Finance minister? Maybe. The person at the top of an organization is rarely all that specialized.

That said, I don't think either is particularly relevant to running a country. Political experience is relevant. A law degree is relevant because that is literally what government is there to do, which is why you see so many lawyers in politics and frankly not that many economists (which, btw, it's a stretch to call Harper). On that front Harper has plenty of earned experience in his adult life. Trudeau has quite a bit as well, but his comes from literally living in the world of politics for his entire life. Which is better? I don't know. But they're both relevant to the job.

Like, you talk about the idea of Trudeau and foreign leaders and... I just don't fathom how you think Harper's super clunky interactions with foreign leaders are likely to turn out better than Justin, who was meeting heads of state when he was a child. Frankly, I think that's one of the things we can probably count on Trudeau, who is basically Canadian quasi-aristocracy, to pull off quite well.

Justin Trudeau just really gives off the impression he is riding hard on his father's (probably the most academically accomplished and intelligent Prime Minister we've ever had)coattails.

How does he give off that impression, exactly?

His resume doesn't compare favourably to Harper and certainly not Mulcair, which doesn't inspire much confidence in me especially considering his weakness on the policy front.

I'd tend to agree that Mulcair has the strongest resume of a politico of the three, but I think if your argument is that Trudeau lacks experience compared to Harper now at running a country, which seems to be the case, we may as well just crown Harper dictator for life because there's no one alive who can claim more than he now except maybe Chretien.

Compared to when Harper became PM? Nope, Trudeau's fine there. At least, aside from fuzzy things like coattails and pretty hair.

I say all this as someone who thinks the Trudeau hype train was overdone to begin with, and who doesn't particularly want him or the Liberals to form government any time soon, btw.

 

[Sakura]

I wonder if the NDP could come out in the federal election with something like "Stephen Harper: Running, but Alberta isn't following." or "The Conservatives: Alberta didn't want them, so why should you?" and have it stick.

But the conservative party in Alberta is not affiliated to the federal conservative party, so I'm not sure if they could/should do that.
And the federal conservative party is polling at 46% in Alberta according to threehundredeight, so I don't know what the 'Alberta isn't following' would convey exactly.

 

[gabbo]

I wonder if the NDP could come out in the federal election with something like "Stephen Harper: Running, but Alberta isn't following." or "The Conservatives: Alberta didn't want them, so why should you?" and have it stick.

They should stick with the positive campaign and spend that money wisely. Going after Harper is Alberta would be a sinkhole

 

[matthewwhatever]

Oooh, a genuine Conservative supporter in our midst. We don't have many of those here. For good reason, since most of what they do is indefensible, but still...a diversity of opinion is always welcome.

I think the issue is that Justin Trudeau has a tendency to stick his foot in his mouth every now and then, which the ad comments on. Also, Harper taught economics at the University of Calgary, which I think is a little far to compare to being a drama teacher. Justin Trudeau might make a competent leader one day, but could you honestly imagine him alongside world leaders like Merkel and Putin? It would look like a joke, at least Mulcair is personally accomplished and has the necessary gravitas

Others have already pointed out that this is pretty much all nonsense. Trudeau's "tendency to stick his foot in his mouth" consists of...what? Pointing out that this government loves to talk tough, even when they don't back in up? Not exactly a disqualifying point, particularly considering the current PM's long history of Canada-bashing before he became PM.

Even if Harper had "taught economics" at U of C -- which he clearly didn't -- that hardly means anything, particularly given that his handling of the economy has been an unmitigated disaster.

And as maharg noted, I wouldn't exactly call Harper's interactions with world leaders a sterling point on his résumé. At best, he's been a laughingstock (i.e. being stuck in a bathroom during a G8 family photo one year). At worst, he's bungled relations with our closest allies, and isolated Canada from doing anything substantive on major issues. On Russia and Iran, he seems content to stamp his feet and make loud, angry noises, rather than actually engaging them or doing anything that alleviates the problem. And in the one area where Canada hasn't been an embarrassment under his watch -- fighting against ISIS/ISIL -- he's been deceitful and secretive. So no, I don't think it'd be possible for Trudeau to be any worse than Harper has been when it comes to dealing with world leaders.

 

[Perspicacity]

They should stick with the positive campaign and spend that money wisely. Going after Harper is Alberta would be a sinkhole

This is a loser mentality. The CPC wouldn't have held the government for so long if they didn't always at least pretend to be a National party.

 

[Azih]

This is a loser mentality. The CPC wouldn't have held the government for so long if they didn't always at least pretend to be a National party.

And conversely the rise in NDP fortunes currently is tied to them, for kind of the first time, appearing to be a National Party with support in both Quebec and Alberta. They can't not put up a fight in Alberta and try to maintain that image.

 

[gabbo]

This is a loser mentality. The CPC wouldn't have held the government for so long if they didn't always at least pretend to be a National party.

I'm not saying don't fight in Alberta, obviously. Fight everywhere, I meant more, don't focus solely on Alberta because of the provincial win.

 

[GSG Flash]

Looks like their support for C-51 is hurting the Liberals enough that they wrote an explanation of their position on their website:

https://www.liberal.ca/liberals-and...utm_source=lpc_post&utm_campaign=c51_20150528

A lot of it just blaming the other parties for creating a negative opinion.

 

[Fuzzy]

Ranked ballots coming to Ontario cities

Ontario is consulting people on how — not if — it should let municipalities use ranked ballots in 2018, and Mayor John Tory and Toronto council are on record as eager to embrace what will be a historic, radical change.

“I would like to see it in place for the next election,” Tory said Thursday, minutes after Municipal Affairs Minister Ted McMeekin officially launched a review of the Municipal Elections Act. “I think it will encourage more people to come into politics.”

Consultations end July 27. McMeekin hopes the Legislature will pass necessary changes in plenty of time to let municipalities officially adopt ranked balloting and start preparations for October 2018 civic elections.

 

[Azih]

This will be great if the amendment allows for multi member districts as well so that an actually better system like STV can be used rather than the just as horrible AV system.

 

[mdubs]

Edit: On second thought, never mind.

 

[gabbo]

Ranked ballots coming to Ontario cities

I wish it would say if the Libs are using Toronto as a pilot for a possible shift in the entire province.

 

[Fuzzy]

I wish it would say if the Libs are using Toronto as a pilot for a possible shift in the entire province.

It's not just Toronto, all municipal elections in Ontario starting in 2018 will have the option of using ranked ballots once the change is made.

As for it eventually extending to elections at the Provincial level, I hope it's more than just ranked ballots if it ever does.

 

[firehawk12]

Given that there aren't really parties in the municipal level, I wonder how that would work. You're really getting into the granular of each ward if you know who your candidates are.

 

[Fuzzy]

Given that there aren't really parties in the municipal level, I wonder how that would work. You're really getting into the granular of each ward if you know who your candidates are.

I really only care about it for the Mayoral races. I'm lucky if I know more than two of the candidates running for Councilor in my ward.

 

[firehawk12]

I really only care about it for the Mayoral races. I'm lucky if I know more than two of the candidates running for Councilor in my ward.

Yeah, I'll admit that when I fill out the local ward part of the ballot, I just vote for the incumbent. That's terrible of me, because municipal politics affects day to day life more than any other level of government, but it's just not that exciting. And although politicians are aligned with "sides", the lack of a party identifier also makes it hard to just pay attention. I can't imagine trying to rank my preference in the next election.

 

[matthewwhatever]

I personally love ranked ballots, but I'm also much more tolerant of FPTP than most people here. Of course, I also probably devote more time to figuring out who to vote for in municipal elections than most people -- I spent about half an hour reading platforms of school trustees last time around, and that's a position that has no impact on my life whatsoever. I kind of like the lack of party ID, since it forces me to look at individual candidates, rather than just at what letters people have next to their names. Considering how few people vote, though, I do wonder whether something like this might actually discourage voting.

That said, it's the right place to test it out. Voter turnout is low at all levels, but especially at the municipal level, so I don't see the harm in trying new systems there, just to see what works and what doesn't. Hopefully internet ballots are next.

 

[Pedrito]

Peter MacKay is gone...

I wonder if there's something sinister going on behind the scene.

 

[firehawk12]

I personally love ranked ballots, but I'm also much more tolerant of FPTP than most people here. Of course, I also probably devote more time to figuring out who to vote for in municipal elections than most people -- I spent about half an hour reading platforms of school trustees last time around, and that's a position that has no impact on my life whatsoever. I kind of like the lack of party ID, since it forces me to look at individual candidates, rather than just at what letters people have next to their names. Considering how few people vote, though, I do wonder whether something like this might actually discourage voting.

That said, it's the right place to test it out. Voter turnout is low at all levels, but especially at the municipal level, so I don't see the harm in trying new systems there, just to see what works and what doesn't. Hopefully internet ballots are next.

I guess it's better to test on a small scale. I'd have preferred if this had happened provincially, of course.

Peter MacKay is gone...

I wonder if there's something sinister going on behind the scene.

Oh really? Maybe the rats are jumping from the sinking ship while they can.

 

[matthewwhatever]

Peter MacKay is gone...

I wonder if there's something sinister going on behind the scene.

?!?!?

That's pretty surprising. When Baird quit a few months ago, Mackay was pretty adamant that he'd be running in the next election.

Diane Ablonczy gave her official resignation yesterday, too, though that had been in the works for a few years, according to media reports.

I didn't think that already-thin Conservative bench could get much thinner, but it somehow is. I wonder who's next? Tony Clement, maybe?

 

[Azih]

It seems to me that Conservative party polling is showing them there's fatigue and a desire for change in the electorate. And there's not very much any party can do to combat that. You can't be agents of change after having spent a decade in power.

 

[GSG Flash]

There definitely is something going on behind closed doors, both Mackay and Baird were two of the Conservatives most popular MPs.

It seems like the Conservatives are in the weakest position they've been in for years, the NDP need to take advantage of this opportunity (I've given up on the Liberals and their ineptitude).

 

[Silexx]

Don't discount the latest Q1 reports on the Canadian economy. The economy has contracted way worse than most predicted.

Factor in that studies show that an electorate will judge a government's economic performance based on the last 6 months prior to an election. We are now in that 6 month period and I bet all indicators are pointing to a disaster for the CPC.

 

[Fuzzy]

That said, it's the right place to test it out. Voter turnout is low at all levels, but especially at the municipal level, so I don't see the harm in trying new systems there, just to see what works and what doesn't. Hopefully internet ballots are next.

Internet voting is already allowed (Markham started over a decade ago) but most municipalities can't get their heads out of their asses.

 

[matthewwhatever]

Really? That's pretty cool. It's kind of baffling it doesn't come up more as a possibility, since it seems like such an obvious thing to do, and elections overseers federally and provincially seem to be trying to find ways to make more people vote.

Don't discount the latest Q1 reports on the Canadian economy. The economy has contracted way worse than most predicted.

Factor in that studies show that an electorate will judge a government's economic performance based on the last 6 months prior to an election. We are now in that 6 month period and I bet all indicators are pointing to a disaster for the CPC.

On the one hand, this is going to be a long, long campaign, and whichever party has the money to dominate the airwaves over the summer will have a good shot at setting up the election narrative. Since the Conservatives have twice as much money and the power of incumbency, that should mean that they'll stand chance of being re-elected, no matter how bad things may look for them now.

On the other hand, if the two main headlines right now are "Conservative cabinet ministers quitting" and "Canada’s economy enters ‘tailspin’ as oil shock takes toll"...I don't know. I want them gone, but the last ten years have shown that just enough people are willing to forgive the Conservatives and Harper for a lot. Alberta showed upsets can happen, but every other election we've had in the last few years has tended towards the least surprising outcome.

 

[gabbo]

Peter MacKay is gone...

I wonder if there's something sinister going on behind the scene.

A ship held together with Bandaids won't last forever.
That said, now that he's gone, is there anyone left from the old federal PC party? Has Preston Manning finally won?

It's not just Toronto, all municipal elections in Ontario starting in 2018 will have the option of using ranked ballots once the change is made.

As for it eventually extending to elections at the Provincial level, I hope it's more than just ranked ballots if it ever does.

It would be a worth-while experiment at that level at least.

 

[CreeperBlocks]

I wonder what's going on behind the scenes in the Conservative Party. Baird left, and now MacKay. Something must be up.

 

[Silexx]

Goddamn, Andrew Coyne delivers the best ether:

The younger MacKay arrived in Parliament just as the Progressive Conservative party, still reeling from the debacle of the 1993 election, was falling to bits under the uncertain leadership of the reborn (“I have come back to make the country whole”) Joe Clark. On Clark’s departure, MacKay ran for leader against a crew that included Jim Prentice, last seen leading the Alberta Progressive Conservatives off a cliff; Craig Chandler, a social conservative of almost cartoonish primitivism; David Orchard, a fanatical anti-free trader who hoped, with the aid of his glint-eyed followers, to turn the party into his personal cult; and Scott Brison, now a Liberal.

MacKay won, on the strength of his good looks, minor dynastic claims, and a written agreement, signed mid-convention in return for Orchard’s support, that there would be no merger with the Canadian Alliance, the last remnant of the old Reform Party. Installed as leader, he promptly negotiated a merger with Stephen Harper, who had won his own party’s leadership, it is often forgotten, on the equivalent pledge (“The Canadian Alliance is here to stay”).

As a PC from Atlantic Canada, he was always assumed, without a lot of evidence one way or the other, to represent the moderate middle, which is to say the status quo, which is to say no serious threat to change anything, and in this country that always wins you points.

The notion being put about that MacKay was some sort of tempering influence on Harper, or that without him — pillar of an Atlantic caucus that is about to be wiped out, leader of the half dozen-strong Progressive Conservative wing of the party — the party’s chances in the next election are appreciably diminished, is the triumph of journalism’s relentless search for significance, even where none exists. It is Harper’s party now? It has always been Harper’s party — though in fairness it is a party that now stands for just about the same things MacKay does, so far as anyone can tell.

It seems unlikely that history will record this as the end of “the MacKay era.” It is difficult to speak of a MacKay legacy, or MacKayism, at least with a straight face. Indeed, it is difficult to recall much about him even now. Though not gone, he is forgotten. We shall look upon his like again.

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/andrew-coyne-peter-mackay-was-a-politician-of-many-titles-but-little-achievement

 

[firehawk12]

The sad part is that I only remember MacKay for killing the PC party and for the weird drama involving Belinda Stronach when she decided to cross the floor.

 

[gabbo]

The sad part is that I only remember MacKay for killing the PC party and for the weird drama involving Belinda Stronach when she decided to cross the floor.

I remember him for that, and using military S&R chopper to get back from a fishing trip

 

[matthewwhatever]

I was a card-carrying, Red Tory PCer, so I've hated Peter Mackay for a long, long time. He's been useless for the entire time he's been in politics.

 

[Buba Big Guns]

 

[Cake Boss]

Fucking arse. I can't stand this fucking country with more Harper, I can't....its too much.

 

[Vibranium]

Fucking arse. I can't stand this fucking country with more Harper, I can't....its too much.

Neither can I. If polls are looking dire I want a coalition to force him out.

 

[GSG Flash]

I think Harper needs to take Diplomacy 101.

I was reading his comments on Putin and, ironically, a lot of what he said about Putin could be attributed to himself.

 

[Leeness]

Oh, I didn't realize this thread existed...

Look what came into effect the other day.

https://bccla.org/2015/06/its-official-second-class-citizenship-goes-into-effect/

I've been pretty disgusted over this all day. It's offensive. Pretty sure this makes most of my extended family, plus maybe my dad, second class citizens.

Vancouver is such a boiling pot, I bet almost half of the city are now second class citizens.

Disgusting. :/

 

[jstripes]

I think Harper needs to take Diplomacy 101.

I was reading his comments on Putin and, ironically, a lot of what he said about Putin could be attributed to himself.

Since when has Harper ever cared about diplomacy?

 

[Sakura]

Oh, I didn't realize this thread existed...

Look what came into effect the other day.

https://bccla.org/2015/06/its-official-second-class-citizenship-goes-into-effect/

I've been pretty disgusted over this all day. It's offensive. Pretty sure this makes most of my extended family, plus maybe my dad, second class citizens.

Vancouver is such a boiling pot, I bet almost half of the city are now second class citizens.

Disgusting. :/

I think this is a bit extreme. They are not "second class citizens". There is no difference in the way they are treated by public or all other laws.
They've just added the ability to strip Canadian citizenship from those with dual citizenship. The only reason it does not apply to those with only Canadian citizenship, is because that would result in them having no citizenship which is impossible and makes no sense (where would they deport those people to, for example?).
There are many countries that have the power to remove citizenship from those with more than one, and some countries don't allow you to have more than one citizenship in the first place.
I can understand disagreeing with the bill, and I don't think the government should/would remove citizenship in anything but the most extreme circumstances (terrorism for example), but for all intents and purposes there are no second class citizens.

 

[GSG Flash]

Since when has Harper ever cared about diplomacy?

Never, but he's being outright destructive nowadays. Even the American government knows how to be pointed in a politically correct way, Harper just blurts out whatever dumb shit he thinks of.

 

[maharg]

I think this is a bit extreme. They are not "second class citizens". There is no difference in the way they are treated by public or all other laws.
They've just added the ability to strip Canadian citizenship from those with dual citizenship. The only reason it does not apply to those with only Canadian citizenship, is because that would result in them having no citizenship which is impossible and makes no sense (where would they deport those people to, for example?).
There are many countries that have the power to remove citizenship from those with more than one, and some countries don't allow you to have more than one citizenship in the first place.
I can understand disagreeing with the bill, and I don't think the government should/would remove citizenship in anything but the most extreme circumstances (terrorism for example), but for all intents and purposes there are no second class citizens.

It adds an extrajudicial process for punishing only some citizens. That is absolutely a difference in the way they are treated by the law.

If other countries also allow foreign courts to trigger a removal of citizenship of their citizens, that is also pretty terrifying. And the fact that there's a reason they can't apply this evenly is not a justification for applying it at all.

 

[Leeness]

I think this is a bit extreme. They are not "second class citizens". There is no difference in the way they are treated by public or all other laws.
They've just added the ability to strip Canadian citizenship from those with dual citizenship. The only reason it does not apply to those with only Canadian citizenship, is because that would result in them having no citizenship which is impossible and makes no sense (where would they deport those people to, for example?).
There are many countries that have the power to remove citizenship from those with more than one, and some countries don't allow you to have more than one citizenship in the first place.
I can understand disagreeing with the bill, and I don't think the government should/would remove citizenship in anything but the most extreme circumstances (terrorism for example), but for all intents and purposes there are no second class citizens.

Unless I'm totally reading it wrong, it sounds like Canadian-born citizens, who could also apply for citizenship elsewhere, are effected as well.

So my cousins were born in Canada, are Canadian, but they could have dual in, I believe, Ireland. So, theoretically, they could have their Canadian citizenship revoked under this. :/

 

[Sakura]

It adds an extrajudicial process for punishing only some citizens. That is absolutely a difference in the way they are treated by the law.

If other countries also allow foreign courts to trigger a removal of citizenship of their citizens, that is also pretty terrifying. And the fact that there's a reason they can't apply this evenly is not a justification for applying it at all.

Ok, but if the logic is that one group of citizens is 'second class' because a certain law applies differently to them than another group of citizens, then most Canadian citizens were already second class citizens.
I'm Canadian born and raised. A friend of mine is Canadian born and raised. However, because my friend is a first nations Canadian citizen and I am not, he receives certain bonuses that I do not receive. The law treats him differently than it treats me. Am I not therefore a second class citizen?
The purpose of the law, is that if someone came from say Iran, got Canadian citizenship, then proceeded to blow up the white house, the Canadian government wants the power to strip him of his Canadian citizenship. Should the Canadian government have that power? I don't know. Clearly it is a controversial issue.
But I disagree that because it has that power, there is suddenly a group of citizens that is inferior, or looked down upon, or discriminated against.

 

[equippedwithtowel]

Ok, but if the logic is that one group of citizens is 'second class' because a certain law applies differently to them than another group of citizens, then most Canadian citizens were already second class citizens.
I'm Canadian born and raised. A friend of mine is Canadian born and raised. However, because my friend is a first nations Canadian citizen and I am not, he receives certain bonuses that I do not receive. The law treats him differently than it treats me. Am I not therefore a second class citizen?
The purpose of the law, is that if someone came from say Iran, got Canadian citizenship, then proceeded to blow up the white house, the Canadian government wants the power to strip him of his Canadian citizenship. Should the Canadian government have that power? I don't know. Clearly it is a controversial issue.
But I disagree that because it has that power, there is suddenly a group of citizens that is inferior, or looked down upon, or discriminated against.

What it is doing is creating a legal framework for all the bad things people have raised. Which is worthy of concern on it's own merits.

 

[gabbo]

Unless I'm totally reading it wrong, it sounds like Canadian-born citizens, who could also apply for citizenship elsewhere, are effected as well.

So my cousins were born in Canada, are Canadian, but they could have dual in, I believe, Ireland. So, theoretically, they could have their Canadian citizenship revoked under this. :/

Yes, that's pretty much it.

 

[Stumpokapow]

Ok, but if the logic is that one group of citizens is 'second class' because a certain law applies differently to them than another group of citizens, then most Canadian citizens were already second class citizens.
I'm Canadian born and raised. A friend of mine is Canadian born and raised. However, because my friend is a first nations Canadian citizen and I am not, he receives certain bonuses that I do not receive. The law treats him differently than it treats me. Am I not therefore a second class citizen?

One of the things about analogy is that the most salient features should be common between the two analogized cases. In this case, they're not. One of the things you are comparing is an extremely minor benefit open to an extremely small minor with an obvious and widely understood motivation that is grounded in history and persists today. The other thing you are comparing is a wide-ranging reworking of citizenship rights, dual citizenship, and the justice system with a motivation that is arguably plain animus but certainly contentious, designed to respond to a new, possibly temporary, fluid public policy problem.

Put it this way, I don't think you would say "how come women can go in the women's bathroom but men can't, yet Arab-Canadians don't want to be deported?" because I think you would recognize that although both are disparate treatments, the comparison would be facile. The thing is, I'm not sure how your aboriginal example is any better.

But I disagree that because it has that power, there is suddenly a group of citizens that is inferior, or looked down upon, or discriminated against.

As a dual citizen by birth, I think it's pretty frustrating that you think it would be non-discriminatory that the government would appoint itself the power to deny my Canadian-ness.

 

[Leeness]

Yes, that's pretty much it.

I was hoping I was wrong.

So, basically, unless you are a Canadian citizen and have no possibility of getting a dual citizenship elsewhere, you are now less Canadian in the eyes of the law. And as Canada is pretty multi-cultural and there are probably a lot of first and second generation citizens, I'm guessing what, a third? Half? Of Canada are now second-class.

I'm hoping that SCC will look at the Charter and realize that this is discrimination and shut it down.

 

[matthewwhatever]

Considering that Harper based an entire campaign around how someone living outside of Canada was somehow less Canadian because of it, this isn't too surprising. It's depressing, but there's clearly a base of people in this country who wholeheartedly support that line of thinking.

 

[gabbo]

I'm hoping that SCC will look at the Charter and realize that this is discrimination and shut it down.

I doubt it would stand up to any real legal challenge. It's like Harper and Co draft troll legislation at this point specifically to call out the judiciary and rile up that weird segment of their base.